Which was the first movie that was a sequel in the “Scary Movie 2” sense? (i.e. an attempt to cash in on the success of the original?)
Gp
FOr as long as movies have been around I suppose
Think of it, Silent Films had the Keystone Cops, Harold Lloyd, Fatty Arbuckle, Charlie Chaplin…
But if you are talking talkies, I think it may be “The Thin Man” series (a excellent series of films). Correct me if I am wrong though
But if you’re not talking talkies, my guess would be Son of the Sheik, with Valentino.
Where’s Eve when we need her?
Tarzan of the Apes staring Elmo Lincoln predated Valentino and Lincoln went on to make another vine swinger. But I think they changed the name to something like Elmo of the Jungle. So I suppose it might not be considered a true sequel.
In the history of sequels, has there ever been a lull? Sure, there were sequels back in the day of Bride of Frankenstein, but has it been continuous? And what about sequels to non-genre movies – “Rocky II” and “Godfather part II” and “The Evening Star” (the late '96 sequel to “Terms of Endearment”)? Maybe pre-TV cinema should be classed differently, as the movie series prefigured the ongoing characters of a TV series.
Elmo Lincoln’s “Tarzan of The Apes” was released in 1918. Enid Markey played Jane.
“Romance of Tarzan” with Lincoln and Markey was released in 1919. Now technically, it’s two movies based on one book as the first film ended about two-thirds of the way through the book and “Romance” finished it. Elmo again played Tarzan in 1921’s “Adventures of Tarzan” (with a sixteen-year-old girl, Louise Lorraine, IIRC, playing Jane).
Weren’t there several silent “Wizard of Oz” films and several silent Sherlock Holmes films, but again, this may not be what the OP is looking for as both were based on book series, and were not sequals fashioned of wholecloth.
Sir Rhosis
Actually, I think you should include The Thin Man. When it was made, there was no plan to make another movie with those characters. But the movie was so successful they made a sequel. This left them in a curious position - the “Thin Man” in the title was the murder victim. So they titled the next movie “After The Thin Man.”
All the movies after that had “Thin Man” in the title, even though it had nothing to do with that character. Sort of like all those Pink Panther movies - the Pink Panther was a diamond in the first movie, and wasn’t in the later movies.
Which points to other categories of sequels: movies made long after the originals (“Return to Oz,” “2010”), continuing the narrative but distantly removed from the original creators.
Also, in searching for sequels, it’s easy to get tripped up by remakes and the like, as there have been dozens of Sherlock Holmses and Draculas (to say nothing of Blackulas). And what of film series like James Bond, where the producers simply mount a new story every few years – though the plots are usually unrelated?
I find the “distant cousin” type of sequels somewhat fascinating, as they continue the main story without the original cast, in a totally different style. Usually they are creative failures, but interesting for their own sake. Contrast this with the more integrated sequels (“Back to the Future,” “Star Trek II-IV”), which could almost be edited into a single epic, like the Godfather was (with the exception of the Elizabeth Shue / Robin Curtis anomalies, explained by a disruption in the time-space continuum 
)
Wasn’t there a sequel to “King Kong” (the original) like “Son of Kong”?
AFAIK, the first sequel with just a Roman (or Hindu-Arabic) numeral was “Godfather II.”
The first sequel that I can think of was “Fall of a Nation,” (1920, maybe) sequel to “Birth of a Nation,” (1915) both based on the similarly-named novels of Thomas Dixon.
It’s no surprise that sequels have been around since the beginning of movies.
Sequels have been around since the beginning of narrative. Homer had a big hit with “The Iliad” and cashed in with “The Oddessy: Iliad II: Odysseus’ Revenge”.
The Internet Movie Database accepts as an answer the 1925 Swedish film about a king, Karl XII, del II (“Del” is Swedish for “Part”), but there are some other early ones according to the FAQ of the newsgroup rec.arts.movies.past-films, but none earlier than that (unless you count 1922’s Dr. Mabuse, King of Crime Part 2, except it was part of one film split up long after original release.
Note : Fixed coding - E.
[Edited by Eutychus55 on 09-16-2001 at 06:04 PM]
Drat that coding! You know what they say about preview-it’s my friend.
A while back (before the current Tim Burton version) I saw a making-of special about The Planet of the Apes narrated by Roddy McDowell.
After the stunning success of the first movie the studio wanted to do a sequel. But when they asked Charlton Heston he was like, “I don’t want to do a sequel. That’s silly, Andy Hardy stuff” (Andy Hardy was a series of rather frivolous 40s films starring Mickey Rooney & Judy Garland).
But the studio persisted. Finally Heston said, “I’ll only do a sequel if I die in the first scene, and you donate my salary to charity”. The studio came back and suggested, “How about if you disappear in the first scene and then you die in the last and you blow up the world as well?” to which he thought “Even better”.